Introduction

Andy
commented that he had not communicated our response to the Executive Committee
regarding campus wide meeting time.

Faculty Salaries

Jim
Carlson said that he brought this item up so that we could discuss whether
there was anything this committee could do to help this issue; he just wanted
it to be explored.

Sharon
Van Eps asked for an update as to what was happening with the budget this
year.Sam Schuman shared that with
reasonable success in the legislature the projection are, tuition will be
increased by 5.5% and salaries by 2.5.This projection is tentative and subject to whatever choices President
Bruininks makes regarding tuition/salaries.Sam expects that we will again be asked to self-fund a
portion of the salary increase ­ it is assumed that this will come from tuition
income.

Sam
explained that it is important to him and Fritz that we create budget resources
to make progress in the salary area above and beyond the central administration
salary mandates.They have
considered starting an endowment with the interest providing a pool of dollars
to supplement faculty salaries.The Twin Cities is ok with this idea.

Jim
asked if there was anything else this committee could do.Fritz and Sam have already made real
efforts to address this, we want to be sure that we do not go around them or
diminish their efforts.Should we
send a memo to Bruininks from this committee?Sam and Fritz thought it was a fine idea, but cautioned that
a response, if any, would not likely come with financial assistance, but rather
suggestions to look at our own resources.How critical is this?Would
we consider sacrificing a position for the salary?Our current student/faculty ratio is 14:1, the best that it
has been in years.In the last
decade our faculty size has been growing and our student enrollment has been
shrinking.

Arne
Kildegaard wondered if doing that would show how committed we are to improving
the salary situation.Can we do
that without hurting programs?Sara Haugen cautioned that salary doesnıt always drive a personıs decision
to work.Remember that if we
reduce positions, there is more work for others and that can also create hard
feelings.Sam echoed that remark,
noting that the 5-6 course option was offered for this same reason and it was
not supported.

We
do have one division who has tried this approach.Science and Math chose to reduce their staff by one position
and the salary was returned to other staff.

LeAnn
asked for information about establishing this endowment.Maddy explained that there is a $25,000
minimum (established by the foundation), currently with a 5% payout rate.The endowments are invested for
growth.Sam felt he could get this
started.

Arne
asked about other schemes in the works.Fritz explained that we could find additional funds in unused sabbatical
replacement funds, other projects or grants.Sam continued that it is conceivable that those funds might
not be found in any given year and a better way to manage the issue of
additional funds would be to invest them in the endowment.

Sam
talked about the culture at UMM.Consider the statistics from the last round of U budget reductions,
Morris really stands out with their commitment to retain people.

(The
figures below illustrate how the Civil Service and bargaining unit staff size
has changed on each campus in the last year:)

Morris-1.0%
Overall
University change-7.3%

Duluth-5.8%

Twin
Cities-7.6%

Crookston-10.1%

It should be noted that these numbers do not
reflect early retirements or positions that remain unfulfilled.UMM may have been more strategic in
saving resources in this way.Andy
suggested that someone might want to draft a document for consideration and
signatures of this committee.

Getty Grant

Lowell Rasmussen shared information about
the Getty Grant and shared handouts of the ³Implementation of the Preservation
Plan².He shared that it is
sometimes difficult to establish and acknowledge the history of UMM and at the
same time maintain/sustain a state of the art campus.They are working with a tight timeline of presenting to the
Regents in May, for approval at the June Regents meeting.He mentioned that the students from the
History Club are trying to get the grant to include non-intrusive signage for
the campus.He would like to hear
comments and suggestions from the committee on the plan, it is a 300 page
document that will be available on-line soon.He will notify us when it is available.

Other updates

1.Handout
with bonding bill status ­ encouraged people to send emails to the conference
committees that are considering these items. Now is crunch time.

2.Would
like to meet with CRPC to discuss pre-design status of Briggs Library and
Blakely Hall.

3.Social
Science building ­ Lowell and Sam are meeting with TC Project Planning
committee this week to review a plan for us to continue with that project.

4.WCROC
has asked UMM to partner with them to establish additional walking trails. They
want to make a path that extends 2nd street to WCROC.WCROC is pursuing a grant.

5.Wind
turbine should be turned on Wednesday.

Next meeting

March 21st at
3:30pm. Talk about endowments.James Carlson and Mark Fohl will not be here.